Race, Gender, and Spirituality in the Workplace

This is a brief essay on race, gender, and spirituality and the role each plays in today’s workforce.  Race and gender comprise the physical makeup of a person.  It is these two aspects of one’s personal being that people are often judged by or perceived.  A person’s spirituality speaks to the core of one self.  It speaks to who that person is on the inside.  What are their core beliefs?  What is their personal value system?  What are their non-negotiables?  The personality of a person is often a reflection of their spirituality.  Race, gender, and spirituality are key aspects of one’s life.  These three aspects make for very “touchy” and often combative discourse when dealing with socio-economic status, perception, stereotypes, biases, and most importantly job status and career growth opportunities. 

            First, I will discuss how race plays a major role in the workplace today.  I will pontificate on how racial discrimination is prevalent not only in today’s society, but in corporate America as well.  Secondly, I will also show how gender and culture play a key role in the selection and appraisement process of business leaders today.  Thirdly, I will delve into the controversial topic of spirituality.  I will offer literature that debates the role that spirituality should or should not play in today’s workplace.  Lastly, I will attempt to share with the reader strategies on how to use race, gender, and spirituality to one’s advantage and how diversity among race, gender, and spiritual beliefs can lead to productivity for any business or company.  

            It is my opinion that one’s race, gender, and spiritual beliefs should play a role in the hiring process in order to create a diverse and culturally aware staff.  However, this is often not the case. Employers often use race, gender and spirituality to shape the company in their own image, enhance and tighten their own power structure, and discriminate against those who don’t “fit the mold” of their desired company model.

            The perception that racial discrimination exists in the workplace is prevalent.  It is a controversial subject that warrants investigation, and discussion.  However, it is very difficult to prove that one has been discriminated against at their job simply because of their race.  “One of the most difficult aspects of racial discrimination at work is that it can often take place entirely undetected.  After all, unless an employer specifically admits otherwise, who can say for sure why they made a particular decision to hire a certain individual or gave another a promotion?” (Findlaw.com, p. 1, 2013)

            Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 defines racial discrimination in the workplace as:

·      Failing or refusing to hire an employee based on their race

·      Firing or disciplining an employee because of their race

·      Paying an employee less or providing them fewer benefits on account of their race

·      Failing to provide benefits, promotions, or opportunities, to an employee because of their race

·      Improperly classifying or segregating employees or applicants by race. 

            These laws are well written and clearly stated.  Once again, how does one go about proving that these laws were broken when it comes to being reprimanded at the job, getting passed over for a promotion, not being hired for a certain position, or being fired from the one an employee currently holds?  The only way one can completely guard against these unfair practices is to create a cultural awareness among employers.  This type of staff development has already begun to take root in many businesses.  “Many project managers have begun implementing a variety of initiatives that foster increased diversity awareness among team members in hopes of improving team effectiveness and overall success.” (Plowman, 2013, p. 1)

          The subject of gender discrimination in comparison to racial discrimination in the workplace is

just as convoluted and hard to prove, yet just as real.  In discussing gender discrimination, I want to talk about leadership, and the influence that gender identification has on leadership in the workplace.  Leadership has often been presented as a phenomenon that is primarily gender and culture neutral. (Ayman & Korabik, 2010) The United States has become a very diverse nation.  Today’s workforce is reflective of that.  It is imperative to have a staff that is diverse and representative of its consumers and the culture in which it exists.  “Kluckhon’s (1951) definition that culture is an acquired and transmitted pattern of shared meaning, feeling, and behavior that constitutes a distinctive human group.” (Ayman & Korabik, 2010, p. 158) 

            In addition, culture has been defined as:  “visible and invisible characteristics that may influence leadership.  Their categories of culture include demographic characteristics (e.g., place of residence and physical gender), status characteristics (e.g., economic and educational variables), ethnographic characteristics (e.g., nationality, ethnicity, and language), and affiliations.” (Ayman & Korabik, 2010, p. 158)  As you can see, according to these definitions, gender plays a major role in one’s culture.

The belief that leadership is culture and gender neutral has caused these two demographic characteristics to be omitted in several studies conducted on the development of leaders and leadership in the workplace.  Ayman and Korabik argue that any study conducted on leadership should include culture and gender as key variables.  In studying the “Implicit leadership theory,” it is easy to establish that women are facing discrimination when it comes to obtaining leadership positions, especially when in those leadership positions exist in stereotypically male dominated fields.

“The image of a leader is strongly associated with men and masculinity.  Research shows that this stereotyped image develops as early as kindergarten.  Girls and women are not as likely to hold this masculine image of a leader as are boys and men.  By and large, the fact that these stereotypes exist is detrimental to women’s ascent into leadership positions. (Ayman & Korabik, 2010, p. 161) This is why theory building in leadership is key, and gender and culture are two variables that should become staples of any future leadership theory practice. 

            Discussing the role that race and gender play in today’s workforce can be uncomfortable for many.  The role spirituality should or should not have in businesses and corporations today often stoke even more discourse than that of the aforementioned variables.  Spirituality at work (SAW) is often described as a good thing, something that fosters individual freedom, and connectivity on oneself.  However, the subjectivity of this concept makes it susceptible to leader interpretations and abuse.  “SAW can become yet another attempt to establish monocultural workplace environments, in which employee dissent is demonized as the sinful antithesis of pure spiritual values, to which only morally deficient individuals could object, and which organizational leaders are uniquely qualified to articulate.” (Tourish & Tourish, 2010, p. 209)

This in turn would effectively create more managerial power rather than establish employee freedom and individual expression.  The pressure to conform to the culture that has been set in place by one’s leader or manager is immense.  With the market being the way it is today, job security is at a premium.  Employers know this and prey on that harsh reality.  This is just one example of many as to why the argument exist that work and spirituality should be separate.  In this instance I tend to agree.  However, I do feel there is a place for individual spirituality at work.  There should not be some overriding set of spiritual ideals that one must conform to in order to avoid being ostracized by the masses.  One should be permitted to express their beliefs individually, so long as it does not inhibit productivity and do irrevocable harm to the overall brand of the company.

Once again, I am of the opinion that one’s race, gender, and spiritual beliefs should play a role in the hiring process in order to create staff that is diverse, culturally, and able to meet the needs of its consumers.  Discrimination on any level is deplorable and has proven to be counterproductive.  In conclusion, utilizing leadership-training methods that promote cultural awareness could help to eradicate employer’s use of race, gender and spirituality to shape companies to their individual liking and help loosen the discriminatory power structure that is so prevalent today.  Included is a short video that will help illustrate the points that were made in this essay.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=77XumqyrsZs

 References:

Ayman, R., & Korabik, K. (2010). Why gender and culture matter.

            American Psychologist, 65(3), 157-170

            doi:  10.1073/a0018806

Plowman, N. (2013). Cultivating diversity awareness in successful project teams. 

Retrieved from http://brighthubpm.com/resource-management/60216-the-importance-of-diversity-awareness-in-successful-project-teams/

Racial discrimination in the workplace. (2013).  Retrieved from

http://employment.findlaw.com/employment-discrimination/racial-discrimination-in-the-workplace.html

Tourish, D., & Tourish, N. (2010). Spirituality at work, and its implications for leadership

and followership:  a post-structural perspective.

Leadership, 207(6), 207-224

doi:  10.1177/1742715010363210 

http://mikehines418.blogspot.com

Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely

This is a brief essay on absolute power, and the positive and negative transformational effects it can have in the business world as well as education.  I will discuss in detail the overwhelming greed that is taking place in businesses today, which includes “over the top” and unnecessary perks that are usually reserved for the upper echelon of various fortune 500 companies.  I will also identify and define what is called the “One-Man Problem.”  This deals with giving too much control and power to one person and how that can negatively affect morale and productivity.

I will show why the self-destructing, unethical behavior displayed by these companies are relevant to the educational field and should be studied to prevent this conduct from taking a stronghold in our schools.  In addition, I will attempt to share with the reader numerous ways on how to avoid these aforementioned “pitfalls” that permeate through various companies, include a short video to further illustrate these strategies, and offer my own opinion on whether absolute power by one person or a group of figureheads bare sole responsibility for the unethical behavior of the entire company or educational institution.

I draw on that experience that I have gained as a teacher and the knowledge I gained from the selected articles in which I will refer to throughout this blog to conclude that absolute power does corrupt absolutely unless effective preventative measures have been in place and been well established long before any unethical behavior by one man, woman, or group of people can permanently affect the corporate culture of their workforce.

Establishing a quality corporate culture that fosters production across the board, one must of course examine the leader, or leaders, and the behavior they display.  In looking at leaders, it is necessary to understand the role they play in the overall growth of the company or school they are entrusted with.  Staff must be made to feel valued and respected.  This is turn will create “buy-in,” and yield results that are beneficial to everyone involved.   The benefits that this shared productivity creates must be distributed throughout the company or school. This creates an even greater issue.  How does one accomplish the task of distributing these benefits fairly?  Who gets what?  This leads me to discuss the value and sometimes-unethical distribution of  “perks.”

In essence, this is one of the biggest ethical decisions companies or educational institutions can make.  “Wise decision-making also, inevitably, involves moral/ethical choices and this occurs every time we take a decision.” (Lloyd, 2009, p. 1) Perks are gifts or privileges offered to “high value” employees.  These usually consist of board members and Chief Executive Officers (CEO’s).  The unfair and often times unethical distribution of perks can have a negative effect on the culture of a company.  CEO’s and other organizational leaders are paid handsomely and rightly so.  However, having access to company cars, private jets, and country club access, all at the shareholders expense is unethical behavior.  This unethical behavior is emboldened by the need to compete with rival companies who are offering the same perks, if not more. 

 Where does one draw the line between necessary competiveness and ethical behavior?  Perks must be distributed proportionately and fit the exact needs of each employee.  By doing that, one is showing that they value each employee on a personal level, separate from the group.  The leader shows a keen awareness of each person’s individual needs.  This can go a long way in maintaining a culture that is productive.

Another potential pitfall companies must be sure not engage in is the “One-Man Problem.”  This is when the leader of the company is given too much autonomy over employees and shareholders she or he has been entrusted to lead.  In situations like this, creating a positive and ethical work environment takes a back seat to impressing and catering to the leader or head of the company.  “Despite fine-sounding mission statements, the internal reality was that no value outranked pleasing the all-powerful and invulnerable boss, an environment that generally produces trouble.” (Kehoe, 2011, p. 59) The “One-Man Problem,” can lead to all types of unethical behavior such as nepotism, a destruction of the company’s reputation, and last but certainly not least, an absorbent amount of unethical spending and pay on the part of the leader.

In comparison, the principal of a school is much like the CEO of fortune 500 companies.  Education is big business.  Funds are dispersed based on productivity.  Teachers feel the pressure to produce high student standardized test scores for fear of being moved or replaced. 

This uneasiness creates a culture of fear.  This culture of fear makes any climate conducive for misconduct and unethical behavior.  It is the leader’s responsibility, whether in the business or in education, to develop a proper ethics-training program that establishes a code on conduct that is modeled by the leader, reinforced through incentives and consequences, as well as making the desired ethical expectations easy to comprehend.

An ethics training program that is easy and fun, as well as taking into consideration character and diversity when hiring, are essential steps to avoiding the pitfalls of unethical behavior and stagnant productivity. “There is less conflict when the work environment is perceived as relatively ethical. (Tsai & Shih, 2005).  In reading William J. Kehoe’s book titled “Business Ethics,” I came across an article that discusses how Warren Buffett hires integrity over ability.  This article talks about how Buffett and his business partner Charlie Munger hire people they can trust and treat them the way they would wish to be treated if the roles were reversed.  This type of ethical behavior and business savvy has made Warren Buffett, chairman of Brookshire Hathaway Inc., one of the richest and most successful men in the world.  Buffett looks for ethics when hiring.  Schools should implement this hiring strategy more often.

In today’s educational world, which focuses almost completely on standardized test results, one should take a step back and re-evaluate its hiring process.  When hiring educators, there should be just as big of an emphasis placed on past pier and pupil responsiveness as well as past student performance levels.  Previous behavior is a good predictor of future behavior.  Learning how to coexist with others as well as not succumb to the pressures of today’s “test crazy” society can go a long way in establishing a culture that is honest, and productive.

In addition to integrity, employee diversity has also been noted to produce positive results in the business world.  This hold true in education as well.  Diversity will create an environment that eliminates or reduces the likelihood of “groupthink,” taking place.  Groupthink is when there is not enough diverse viewpoint on a certain matter.  One train of thought permeates throughout the group.  There is no room of dissent or constructive discourse.  This can prove to be problematic, especially when it comes to education.  The students that educators are entrusted to lead often come from diverse backgrounds.  I believe the staff should adequately reflect its student population.  This in turn would help to create a better rapport amongst the staff and students as well as the community.

In conclusion, I believe that absolute power does corrupt absolutely.  The leader sets the tone for the culture of the company or institution.  This can be done through the establishment of a corporate culture system that places a value on ethical behavior.  It is up to the leader to model this ethical behavior, demand it from his or her subordinates, and hold accountable those who do not adhere to the ethical standards that have been set. 

“Company leaders must be actively involved in building a corporate values system by developing the ethical framework, aligning the organization to that framework, leading by example and addressing external challenges that pose ethical dilemmas to employees’ behaviour. (Sims, 2000) As stated earlier, I have included a video to help illustrate key initiatives that could help foster ethical behavior in an any workplace environment.   

www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_9857ZesPM

 References:

Kehoe, W. J.  (2013).  Business Ethics.

            New York, NY:  McGraw-Hill

Lloyd, B.  (2009). Power, responsibility & wisdom:  exploring the issues at the core of

ethical decision-making and leadership.  The Journal of Values-Based Leadership, 2(6), 1-16.  Retrieved from http://www.wisdompage.com/bloyd03.html

Sims, R. R. (2000). Changing an organisation’s culture under new leadership.  Journal of

Business Ethics, 25, 65-78.

Thoms, J. C. (2008). Ethical integrity in Leadership and organizational moral culture. 

Leadership, 4, 419-441.

doi: 10.1177/1742715008095189

Tsai, M. T., & Shin, C. M. (2005). The influences of organisatinal and personal ethics on

role conflict among marketing managers:  an empirical investigation, International Journal of Management, 22(1), 54-61

http://mikehines418.blogspot.com

Ethics, Morality and Philosophical Beliefs

 This is a brief reflective essay on two journal articles:  “Taoist Leadership Ethics,” by Craig Johnson and “The Practice Value of Philosophical Thought for the Ethical Dimension of Education,” by Robert D. Helsep.  These two articles focus on the role ethics, morality, and philosophical beliefs play in the educational system today.  I will attempt to share with the reader, my own theoretical analysis of why these three components are serviceable in aiding student and teacher success, as well as provide a brief video to add to the subject matter that will be presented. 

            Ethics can be described as moral choices.  “Morality is viewed as the system of rules that regulate the social interactions and social relationships of individuals within societies and is based on concepts of welfare (harm), trust, justice (comparative treatment and distribution) and rights.” (Oladipo, 2009, p. 149)  Heslep (1997) noted that philosophy provides theories of ethics, principles, and skills that help educational leaders make judgments.  It is my estimation after reading these two selected articles, as well as researching several other scholarly articles on this topic, that ethics, morality, and a philosophical approach to education all serve a purpose and play an essential role in the development and maintenance of academic success among school age children and the teachers who serve them. 

In reviewing the first article, Taoist Leadership Ethics, Johnson describes Taoism as “an integrated philosophical system with its own set of assumptions about the origins of the universe, human nature, ways of understanding, and spirituality.” (Johnson, 2000, p. 82)  In simpler terms, Taoism is a train of thought, not a set of actions or processes.

It places an emphasis on the leader-follower relationship and how to enhance it.

The two key components of Johnson’s article concerning the role Taoist play in leadership ethics today are its leadership principles and its ethical implications.  Taoist leadership principles are simple.  Less is more.  Taoist believes the less the government plays a role in setting and governing educational policy, the better.  They feel government is distrustful in nature and creates a barrier between leaders and their followers.  When subordinates are left alone to do the job they have been hired to do, and are not micro managed, they feel empowered, valued, and trusted.  Johnson argues that this sign of trust will allow followers to freely obey natural laws, which in turn will have a positive effect on society.

            In giving teachers that kind of autonomy, leaders are entrusting these individuals to make proper ethical decisions.  “Ethical decision making in Taoism is based on conformity to principles manifested in the natural or phenomenological world rather than on the consequences of choices (teleological ethics) or on cultural standards or values (deontological ethics).  Right actions are those that reflect the workings of the physical world:  nonaction,

assisting but not controlling, softness, weakness, dwelling below, genuineness (Ku-ying, 1977).

Being a leader who is soft or weak is often frowned upon in any business or organization.  Taoist argues that being soft or weak means you are flexible, amenable, open to change.  In contrast, death is often associated with being rigid, stiff, and immovable.  Traits such as the latter, can serve as a detriment to any company or leader.  As a leader, one must learn to adapt, grow, and embrace new ideas that encourage or assist in helping push a school or company forward. 

I found this to be an interesting analogy while reading Johnson’s views on the leadership ethics Taoist aim to exemplify.  The ethics one displays in essentially a mirror of the own moral compass.

An empirical study was conducted among a group of teachers in Portugal.  When these teachers were asked to express their opinion on being a teacher, they responded that is was “essentially an ethical activity:  ethical since the teacher has to act according to a set of moral principles and also due to the fact that the teacher is expected to employ strategies which develop a method and use resources to encourage the ethical education of pupils.”  (Caetano & Silva, 2009, p. 46) These findings lead me to discuss the role philosophy should or should not play in making these crucial ethical decisions that affect so many.

 Robert D. Heslep investigates this very argument in his article.  Heslep argues in favor of utilizing philosophy in to help shape the ethical decisions educators are forced to make when presented with dilemmas that require such a decision to be made.  “Not only does philosophy, according to this position, provide theories of ethics, but it also furnishes principles and includes skills that are relevant to making judgments in educational leadership.” (Heslep, 1997, p. 68)  Heslep also believes that superintendents, administrators, and teachers often rely too much on their own experience, common sense, staff development training, and not enough of well thought out philosophical reflection.

Mr. Gary J. Conti supports Helsep’s argument for the inclusion of philosophical thinking to be included in educational ethical decision-making in a separate article.  Conti believes the teacher-learner process has to be better understood for true academic achievement and growth to occur.  “For teachers, this involves better understanding of what we do in the classroom and why we do it.  One way to accomplish this is for teachers to become aware of their educational philosophies because true professionals know not only what they do, but also are aware of the principles and reasons for acting.” (Conti, 2007, p. 19)  As a teacher for over 13 years, I have been forced to make several ethical decisions concerning my students.  When the time came to make those crucial decisions, I relied on my own standards of ethics, morals, and the philosophy that what ever decision is in the best interest of the student, is the decision that needs to be made.  When teaching and making ethical decisions, I try to live by the five principles of ethics as they apply to teaching and nurturing our nation’s youth.  Ana Weinstein list them as: 

1.     Do no harm

2.     Make things better

3.     Respect others

4.     Be fair

5.     Be loving

These five principles are basically the ethical, moral and philosophical framework I choose to teach and live by.

I believe that ethics, morality, and philosophy should all play a vital role in any ethical decision that involves a policy or procedure that will affect students and student learning.  A leader who acts ethically and makes moral choices is a non-negotiable in my estimation.  The idea of whether to incorporate philosophy into the decision making process is still up for debate.  However, I see no harm in giving pause to create constructive philosophical discourse.  In conclusion, I agree with the premise of Heslep and Johnson’s articles that philosophy is an important cog in the process of making sound, reasonable, and well thought out ethical decisions when it comes to education.

In the space below, I have provided a short video, which I think, will give any leader a guideline to making sound decisions based in part on the information that was addressed in this essay.

References:

Caetano, A. P., & Silva, M. D. (2009). Professional ethics and teacher education.  Sisifo

Education Sciences Journal, 8, 47-54.  Retrieved from http://sisifo.fpce.ul.pt

Conti, G. J. (2007).  Identifying your educational philosophy:  development of the

philosophies held by instructors of lifelong-learners (PHIL).  MPAEA Journal of

Adult Education, 36(1), 19-35.

Heslep, R. D. (1997). The practical value of philosophical thought for the ethical

dimension of educational leadership.  Educational Administration Quarterly, 33, 67-85.

doi:10.1177/0013161X97033001004

Johnson, C. (2000). Taoist leadership ethics.  Journal of Leadership & Organizational

Studies, 7(1), 82-91.

doi:10.1177/10719190000700108

Ku-ying, C. (1977).  Lao tzu:  Text, notes and comments.

            San Francisco, California:  Chinese Materials Center

Weinstein, A. (2009). Ethics is the classroom:  what you need to know.  Retrieved from

            http://www.education.com/magazine/article/cheating-ethics/

http://mikehines418.blogspot.com